Why is business so hard? D:

Girlfriend's business is too big for just her to keep up with all the work, which means we need a hire. That requires (at least) a tax licence, which, for her means more paperwork than most people since she has govt' benefits.
On top of that, a new hire would mean getting an actual office space instead of working purely from home. Which means money. Thankfully spaces around here are pretty damn cheap, but still..

I feel like this is a big hump we need to get over, and once we have the money to do it (and be able keep affording it) then things will become much easier since we'll already have all the utilities we'd need. The problem is getting them in the first place and then making sure we have the budget to keep them.

Too much paperwork and money, man.

At 10/23/14 09:19 PM, egg82 wrote: Too much paperwork and money, man.

Real life was designed poorly, in a video game that would all be done with a single button click. All about that user experience.

At 10/23/14 10:34 PM, MSGhero wrote: Real life was designed poorly, in a video game that would all be done with a single button click. All about that user experience.

nope, still sucks.

At 10/24/14 08:15 PM, egg82 wrote: public final void payBills() {
money -= money * 2;

The only way to not end up in debt, then, is to not make any money at all. No money to pay, no bills to slay.

At 10/25/14 02:45 AM, Gimmick wrote: The only way to not end up in debt, then, is to not make any money at all. No money to pay, no bills to slay.

Yeah, but then you wind up with no car, house, or girlfriend.

At 10/25/14 03:25 PM, egg82 wrote: Yeah, but then you wind up with no car, house, or girlfriend.

Every time I get a paycheck from my campus job, I rejoice. Every time I buy groceries, I cry. I'm not sure what will happen when I'm the one who has to pay for rent, utilities, and stuff...

At 10/25/14 03:25 PM, egg82 wrote: girlfriend.

No money = no girlfriend??

At 10/25/14 03:50 PM, MSGhero wrote: Every time I get a paycheck from my campus job, I rejoice. Every time I buy groceries, I cry. I'm not sure what will happen when I'm the one who has to pay for rent, utilities, and stuff...

It's not too bad if you can manage your money, gotta buy what you can afford.

That means only buy beans and eggs

At 10/25/14 03:56 PM, Sam wrote: It's not too bad if you can manage your money, gotta buy what you can afford.

That means only buy beans and eggs

I make enough that I don't have to do that, it's just a shock each time I see the grocery receipt. After I graduate and I have to pay for my own crappy internet and rent, that's when I'll stick to popcorn and ramen.

it will never be as good as the 2nd fastest wifi in the country and 0ms ping wired that I have here

I suck at grocery shopping because I always procrastinate till i run out of food and I am starving.

Never go grocery shopping when your starving. bad idea...

Any of you guys familiar with POST requests for multipart/form-data? I have to do it for the newgrounds api. I used a swf decompiler to get at the source code, but it's confusing as hell without proper local variable names.

At 10/25/14 10:38 PM, MSGhero wrote: Any of you guys familiar with POST requests for multipart/form-data? I have to do it for the newgrounds api. I used a swf decompiler to get at the source code, but it's confusing as hell without proper local variable names.

Ahh, good luck. I guess check what your browser is sending in terms of headers and copy that?

On a side-note, what the actual fuck did I just stumble across?

At 10/26/14 04:02 AM, egg82 wrote: Ahh, good luck. I guess check what your browser is sending in terms of headers and copy that?

I mean, I have ng's source, but there's no documentation about this part at all, and the documentation for the related parts is just incorrect. I'll have to do that or walk through the code with test cases.

Hey guys, I used to post here pretty much every week (nine years ago... wow.) and just sort of remembered this place existed.

I just did a talk on HTML5 and Flash's expiration date. I'm probably going to be doing more of these talks in the future since it was well received, and I wanted to reach out by asking a quick question.

How does everyone feel about HTML5 applications now being an official w3c standard? If you're not sure what that is, it essentially means that browsers now have to start building to support all of HTML5's specifications. This was the biggest issue with HTML5 vs Flash, and since HTML5 has a death grip on the mobile platform it is really bad news for Flash.

What do you guys see for Flash's future?

Thanks!

At 10/30/14 05:00 PM, Trunks wrote: How does everyone feel about HTML5 applications now being an official w3c standard?

It's great. I've hated Flash Player for years now (because it's a buggy, bloated, insecure pile of shit) and am very happy to see an alternative be made the standard. The only downside being that HTML5 applications need to be written in, or converted to, JavaScript, which is a less than stellar language. In the end I would much rather write JavaScript than have to deal with Flash Player.

At 10/30/14 05:00 PM, Trunks wrote: What do you guys see for Flash's future?

It's going to slowly die off but it will never fully disappear, not unlike Java web and desktop applications: they do still exist but it's not common to come across them (fortunately).

Anyway, I don't remember you, but welcome back. Feel free to stay; the water's fine. :)

At 10/30/14 05:27 PM, Diki wrote:

At 10/30/14 05:00 PM, Trunks wrote: How does everyone feel about HTML5 applications now being an official w3c standard?

It's great. I've hated Flash Player for years now (because it's a buggy, bloated, insecure pile of shit) and am very happy to see an alternative be made the standard. The only downside being that HTML5 applications need to be written in, or converted to, JavaScript, which is a less than stellar language. In the end I would much rather write JavaScript than have to deal with Flash Player.

Having worked exclusively with HTML5 applications for the last 2 years I can safely say that it is a bigger pile of shit than the flash player ever was.

The thing about Flash is, you write it once, and it would play everywhere exactly the same. In contrast with HTML5 you are at the mercy of the browsers implementation. The amount of bugs, performance differences and "special cases" per browser is staggering. Then it only takes someone to release a new browser with some new drawback and you have to patch / rebuild your entire library of products. Also just want to add Javascript is absolutely awful to work with on a large scale.

At 10/30/14 05:00 PM, Trunks wrote: What do you guys see for Flash's future?

It's going to slowly die off but it will never fully disappear, not unlike Java web and desktop applications: they do still exist but it's not common to come across them (fortunately).

Anyway, I don't remember you, but welcome back. Feel free to stay; the water's fine. :)

Flash still completely dominates rich applications (games especially) in the browser, I don't see that changing for quite some time, but since more focus is being shifted to native mobile applications anyway, it will die in a different way.

Just my 2 pence

At 10/31/14 05:34 AM, Rustygames wrote: The thing about Flash is, you write it once, and it would play everywhere exactly the same. In contrast with HTML5 you are at the mercy of the browsers implementation. The amount of bugs, performance differences and "special cases" per browser is staggering. Then it only takes someone to release a new browser with some new drawback and you have to patch / rebuild your entire library of products. Also just want to add Javascript is absolutely awful to work with on a large scale.

Do you think the w3c whatever will make html5 more consistent?

Someone also said js was a pain when the project gets big: http://io.pellucid.com/blog/the-benefits-of-transpiling-to-javascript

Just my 2 pence

It's 2 cents not 2 pence /'murica

At 10/31/14 09:27 AM, MSGhero wrote:

At 10/31/14 05:34 AM, Rustygames wrote: The thing about Flash is, you write it once, and it would play everywhere exactly the same. In contrast with HTML5 you are at the mercy of the browsers implementation. The amount of bugs, performance differences and "special cases" per browser is staggering. Then it only takes someone to release a new browser with some new drawback and you have to patch / rebuild your entire library of products. Also just want to add Javascript is absolutely awful to work with on a large scale.

Do you think the w3c whatever will make html5 more consistent?

They can't really do anything. Just because there is a standard, doesn't mean people will follow it properly. How long were we forced to make countless hacks for IE6? Android stock browser is the new IE in terms of horrible implementations of standards :(

Someone once said to me they didn't like Flash because you were at the mercy of adobe, which is true, but I would rather put up with 1 platforms bullshit than 10+ :P

Someone also said js was a pain when the project gets big: http://io.pellucid.com/blog/the-benefits-of-transpiling-to-javascript

You wouldn't believe the amount of special build processes I've had to implement to work with JS in any sort of organised fashion for large company sizes

Just my 2 pence

It's 2 cents not 2 pence /'murica

I know but I'm taking it back. I suppose it's more like 1 pence because of the exchange rate:

https://www.google.co.uk/search?rlz=2C1CHFX_enGB0538GB0538&biw=944&bih=951&noj=1&sclient=psy-ab&q=0.02+usd+in+proper+money&oq=0.02+usd+in+proper+money&gs_l=serp.3...3989.3989.1.4132.1.1.0.0.0.0.134.134.0j1.1.0....0...1c.1.58.serp..1.0.0.st3-n-oeCOs

Hey, how do you guys feel about AS3/Haxe entering a VR space like Google Cardboard or Oculus Rift?

At 10/31/14 09:27 AM, MSGhero wrote: Do you think the w3c whatever will make html5 more consistent?

Didn't they release the final specification for HTML not long ago?

Regardless of that, there still seems to be a lot of discrepancies between browsers concerning HTML5 features that were in the spec years ago.

At 10/31/14 11:40 AM, MintPaw wrote: Hey, how do you guys feel about AS3/Haxe entering a VR space like Google Cardboard or Oculus Rift?

I think s3d lib is for that (stereoscopic 3d?), and why are you in this thread? You never are.

At 10/31/14 05:34 AM, Rustygames wrote: Having worked exclusively with HTML5 applications for the last 2 years I can safely say that it is a bigger pile of shit than the flash player ever was.

I've only ever worked with both as a hobby, as I've never done any professional work with either, nor would I want to. From a development standpoint I've found both are very far from perfect technologies and can be very annoying, but only Flash Player has gotten on my nerves from a user standpoint. I couldn't even count the number of times Flash Player has locked up my browser over the years, which has happened to me as recently as last week while I was watching a YouTube video (I've been meaning to switch over to the HTML5 player but the last time I used it, it was apparent that Google either rushed it or was experimenting with it, as it had very odd behaviour).

Ultimately my experience has been that HTML5 applications suck and cause issues when they're poorly developed, but Flash Player applications suck and cause issues because of Flash Player, which is where my disdain for the technology comes from; I haven't yet had an HTML5 application lock up my browser.

At 10/31/14 05:34 AM, Rustygames wrote: Also just want to add Javascript is absolutely awful to work with on a large scale.

That I completely agree with. JavaScript has certainly improved but it is very obvious that the language was developed in less than a week by a dude who didn't really care about what he was doing (thanks a lot, Eich). It's the second shittiest language in common usage, in my opinion (PHP having a well-deserved first place), and things like CoffeeScript popping up just make everything worse. If ever there were a stupid, pointless hipster-language, it's CoffeeScript.

At 10/31/14 05:34 AM, Rustygames wrote: Flash still completely dominates rich applications (games especially) in the browser, I don't see that changing for quite some time, but since more focus is being shifted to native mobile applications anyway, it will die in a different way.

Flash Player won't be dying any time soon, that's for sure, but it is inevitable. Even Netflix has jumped on the HTML5 bandwagon now, and thank Christ for that because, incidentally, fuck Silverlight. There will no doubt be more games being created in HTML5 as more development tools are released, such as ImpactJS (which is a solid game engine; much better than Flixel and FlashPunk, in my opinion).

At 10/31/14 12:22 PM, Diki wrote: JavaScript has certainly improved but it is very obvious that the language was developed in less than a week by a dude who didn't really care about what he was doing (thanks a lot, Eich).

Whatever happened to Javascript 2.0???

At 10/31/14 12:22 PM, Diki wrote: CoffeeScript popping up just make everything worse. If ever there were a stupid, pointless hipster-language, it's CoffeeScript.

I've used TypeScript a couple of times which I didn't mind.

CoffeeScript looks a little weird. If you prefer that syntax then that's fine, but I don't understand why they would change it so much that it's not immediately understood by a JavaScript programmer.

Will the piqued interest and usage of JavaScript result in there being an overhaul of the language? I'd assume it would just become like the state of HTML5 now (or maybe last year), where as features are released, they slowly trickle into existing technologies that use it.

At 11/1/14 10:46 AM, Sam wrote: CoffeeScript looks a little weird. If you prefer that syntax then that's fine, but I don't understand why they would change it so much that it's not immediately understood by a JavaScript programmer.

That's why I called it a hipster-language: when the designer(s) were presented with the choice to follow a common convention and have something that makes sense or instead do something different, they opted to do something different, even when it completely sacrifices readability and damn near guarantees programmers will accidentally introduce erroneous behaviour.

One of the worst offenders of the language:

Which gets converted to the following JavaScript:

And if you instead do this:

You get this:

CoffeeScript is so far beyond stupid and poorly designed that I don't even know what to call it. Hipsters, man. Fuckin' hipsters.

At 11/1/14 10:46 AM, Sam wrote: Will the piqued interest and usage of JavaScript result in there being an overhaul of the language?

It's possible, but then every browser would need to implement the new spec, and historically there has never been a single browser that didn't fuck up some part of that at some point in its development (Internet Explorer being very infamous for it), so if there ever is an overhaul, it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better. And therein lies the problem with having a client-side scripting language being in widespread use in web development.

At 11/1/14 08:22 PM, Diki wrote: One of the worst offenders of the language:

foo () -> "hello world"

Which gets converted to the following JavaScript:

Coffeescript is so weird looking. Then again, idk javascript at all, so the haxe output is weird-looking too: http://try.haxe.org/#90313. It might be normal js for all I know.

Have you guys watched any of Jon Blow's vids about his wip programming language for games? It seems interesting, but I doubt I'd ever need to go that low level with pointers and junk.

At 11/2/14 12:10 AM, MSGhero wrote: Coffeescript is so weird looking. Then again, idk javascript at all, so the haxe output is weird-looking too: http://try.haxe.org/#90313. It might be normal js for all I know.

The JavaScript output only looks weird because Haxe is classical and JavaScript is not, it's a prototypal language. JavaScript also only has a very rudimentary concept of objects, so with that being true and it being prototypal means that you don't have classes and attempting to make something that is class-like ends up with goofy code like the Haxe output. It also looks like the Haxe developers deliberately wrote Haxe that would be converted to a convoluted mess.

If you're familiar with ActionScript then you will pretty much already know JavaScript because they're both dialects of ECMAScript. The only real difference between AS3 and JavaScript is that AS3 has classes and static objects. This is a JavaScript framework that I wrote a while ago that can give you an idea of what properly-written JavaScript looks like.

Radom thing, but holy shit this music

At 10/31/14 09:27 AM, MSGhero wrote:

At 10/31/14 05:34 AM, Rustygames wrote:

Do you think the w3c whatever will make html5 more consistent?

They can't really do anything. Just because there is a standard, doesn't mean people will follow it properly. How long were we forced to make countless hacks for IE6? Android stock browser is the new IE in terms of horrible implementations of standards :(

Very literally this means that browsers are going to start building for HTML5 tags to be interpreted correctly, and Chrome won't be the only browser that loves HTML5. We are STILL forced to make hacks for IE6, because IE6 was developed before the current standard was a standard. We will have to create hacks for IE10/Firefox/Chrome when HTML5 is the vernacular, but that's just the nature of compatibility.

Users are more and more being forced to update rather than having it as an option; IE being built into Windows 8 and updating itself is pretty indicative of the fact that there will come a time where it will be hard to find someone running even IE8/9.

Javascript is horrible for large projects

Well, arguably so is Actionscript; hopefully with the introduction of HTML5 as a standard we will start to see serious optimizations for workflow and development in regards to media with Javascript. The point you made about browser-specific optimizations is an extremely good one; doesn't look like there's going to be an elegant solution anytime soon.

Coffeescript is a hipster crap-boat

Totally agree with this point. There are some things like it that I appreciate, like CSS pre-compilers that came from hipster web devs, but badly-designed JS libraries/frameworks are not anything I appreciate.

Thanks for the input guys!

I spent hours trying to figure out what was wrong with loading save files in the haxe NG api...turns out haxe converts http request data to strings before sending it out to the callbacks. The data I was testing with had a 0x00 byte, so the string was reading \0 null termination and dropped the rest of the data. I made an issue for it, but it turns out it's been an issue for at least 8 months that didn't come up from searching.

Open source sucks sometimes.

I keep seeing interesting stuffs on the interwebs. Any thoughts on this?